|
Post by dougeye on May 16, 2017 15:32:17 GMT -5
No they are ogryns
|
|
|
Post by Melissia on May 16, 2017 16:35:44 GMT -5
Marine... marines? Sorry this is just getting too confusing. Are the guard going to experimented on? Will we get Astra Militarum Guard -Guard servitors? My joke name for the Primaris Marines. Because they're more marine than your marines, you see, they're the Mariniest Marines that ever Marined Marinier than your Marines could ever MArine. They're marine to the marine'th power. Space Marine ^ Space Marine, if you will. Thus, Marinemarines. Because it's juvenile and childish and unimaginative. Just like the Marinemarines.
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on May 17, 2017 7:46:23 GMT -5
Ironically they made this t-shirt out of date as well. Next up will be Godzilla marines riding dinosaurs because that was more efficient than just strapping more grav cannons onto everything.
|
|
|
Post by RedsandRoyals on May 17, 2017 8:43:39 GMT -5
@chem: Dinosaurs are the Exodite Eldar's gig, at least for now.
I'm still trying to figure out which side of the Warp Rift my armies will be on, since I have Ultramarines AND Blood Angels...
|
|
|
Post by Melissia on May 17, 2017 9:08:26 GMT -5
My Sisters army is unaffected by it, as they were located on the edge of the Maelstrom warp storm.
|
|
|
Post by RedsandRoyals on May 17, 2017 10:01:20 GMT -5
My Sisters army is unaffected by it, as they were located on the edge of the Maelstrom warp storm. Let's hope they got out of the way when the Maelstrom started expanding.
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on May 17, 2017 10:06:54 GMT -5
Luckily my armies are all in Ultima Segmentum, just under the warp rift in a line. So I guess they got annihilated by daemonic tea infusions.
I think marines will get super marines riding on super dragons before guard get rough riders, unfortunately. Look at AoS - troll slayers on lizards, dark elves and lizardmen on cold ones and now Sigmarines riding on lizards.
|
|
|
Post by Melissia on May 17, 2017 10:28:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by RedsandRoyals on May 17, 2017 10:58:35 GMT -5
No penalties for moving and shooting heavy weapons and 5+ Inv saves against shooting for DE skimmers, too.
My body is ready.
|
|
|
Post by Trickstick on May 17, 2017 11:00:42 GMT -5
Out here in Segmentum Tempestus, everything seems ok.
|
|
|
Post by RedCuffs on May 17, 2017 13:43:26 GMT -5
Luckily, at the onset of the rift developing, my entire army was secured in various boxes behind the sofa. Further, for extra protection, those boxes were lined with "rift-proof foam". The "Imperial Navy Ground Combat Assets" are safe and unaffected.
|
|
|
Post by RedsandRoyals on May 18, 2017 9:30:29 GMT -5
All vehicles have a movement stat like everyone else, as well as the armor save and wounds that were previously shown. The biggest change is that vehicles now have a WS & S value, to represent "Crush and Grind" tactics, and can charge and fight in close combat, effectively replacing tank shock. Most vehicles will have very poor WS though.
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on May 18, 2017 9:39:48 GMT -5
That's better than being auto-hit. Especially by Ork bikers with power klaw because its pretty much insta-kill in 7th.
|
|
|
Post by RedCuffs on May 18, 2017 16:41:11 GMT -5
Although I have high hopes for 8th ed I'm sure there'll be some elements of the new rules that won't be as good or sensible as the previous. And everything so far is very encouraging but my biggest dislike so far is that I think that there should be some sort of advantage to tactical manoeuvring so as to hit a vehicle in its side or rear. I doesn't appear that anything like a simple modifier has been mentioned yet. If it ends up that my Chimera is just as tough on the vertical rear as it is on the sloping front I reckon I'm still going to love playing 8th. I just wonder why it hasn't been thought of.
|
|
|
Post by RedCuffs on May 18, 2017 17:13:57 GMT -5
And another thing. I like playing an entirely drop troop list. I use the Forgeworld Elysian rules and the D99 too. Deep striking my MSU's agogo.
Normally with a ed update I could carry on with the existing codex and FW extras. I think this time the changes won't allow that.
How long do you reckon it'll be until FW adapt their rules for 8th ? It'll be painful for me to know that I'm going to be waiting a year or to for it.
Unless ...
Dah - Duh - DAAAAA !!!
Our new codex allows us to take an option for drop troops ... a bit like the doctrine in the 4th ed codex ... now, there's a thought ...
|
|
|
Post by Trickstick on May 18, 2017 18:13:44 GMT -5
How long do you reckon it'll be until FW adapt their rules for 8th ? I heard that they are doing it at release. It may only be a stop gap, but at least it will be something. Also, you never know what they may drop if it is possible with the main codex. I would imagine that FW models will get rules but some/all of the lists may not, as they are not quite as important to field the models. In other news, I heard that "owner selects" wound allocation is back. It is not perfect but I think I prefer it over the methods of the past few editions.
|
|
|
Post by emptyhat on May 18, 2017 19:24:34 GMT -5
Casualties from the 'front' was pretty perilous but it was interesting, I don't know if I like it any more or less than basic troopers being extra wounds for the upgrades.
Maybe vehicles will end up coming with a Chimera T8, T-2 for side and rear targeting?
|
|
|
Post by RedCuffs on May 19, 2017 5:14:49 GMT -5
/quote]I heard that they are doing it at release. It may only be a stop gap, but at least it will be something. That's encouraging but I just hope it's not another rush job full of flaws. IA 8 springs to mind. Where did you /hear that little gem ? Casualties from the 'front' was pretty perilous but it was interesting, I don't know if I like it any more or less than basic troopers being extra wounds for the upgrades. Maybe vehicles will end up coming with a Chimera T8, T-2 for side and rear targeting? Casualties from the from the front is the way it should always have been I think, just makes sense. Yep, that's the kind of modifier I was thinking about. Something on the vehicle stats that would stipulate side/top hits T-1. Rear hits T-2. For axample, Sableclaw is AV 14 front and side but only AV10 on the rear at the moment. Probably to replicate the fragility of the exposed engines of a land speeder. How Could 8th represent that with the rules that have been leaked so far ?
|
|
|
Post by nutty on May 19, 2017 5:42:11 GMT -5
I think a lot of the rules are to simple.. the vehicle & casualty are two prime examples, but the removal of templates is another IMHO.
Sure it makes the game faster & more streamlined, but it also means there is no longer any reason to think about model placement. Just push everything forward and don't worry about protecting rear armour/special weapons/etc.
The game was getting complex to the point where I can see it becoming daunting for those starting out, but now they are taking it to far in the opposite direction where it is becoming so simple that a lot of players are wondering if they'll enjoy the new edition...
|
|
|
Post by RedCuffs on May 19, 2017 8:25:22 GMT -5
I've got to agree. I was never a big fan of 7th mainly due to complexity whereby to fully comprehend everything would require the same amount of study as a masters degree. There were some excellent changes (wounds taken from the front for example) but it stopped becoming enjoyable. I think I had more fun playing Boom Beach than playing 40K.
I'll miss templates too. Yes, they soaked up more time than they should have. Create differences of opinion between the players (especially combined with the scatter dice factor) Which soaked up more time and, depending upon who your pick up game is with, it can spoil the fun atmosphere sometimes.
Not everyone agrees when I say the game should be played in the same way as war is fought. I don't subscribe to the "yeah but this is the 41st millennium so this (insert rubbish thing here) should be allowed. I think it's a cop out for cheese and power gaming.
I play it like I'd be fight in a real battle. I remember in basic training the maintenance of spacing on patrol and contacts was hammered into us. Literally a four knuckle reminder (early '80's ... it was ok back then).
And templates forced you to think of that spacing. And encouraged you to look for where your opponent has neglected to employ spacing. There were times when you could try to force your opponent to bunch up or trap himself in a bottleneck.
I'll miss that.
An option for GW would have been two (maybe three) rule sets. Recruit rules and Veteran rules. Having similar basics but then the vet rules bolt on when you're ready for a greater degree of complexity. Progressive modular learning. It's like how I thought my kids to play chess. First few games we only used pawns. Next few games we added castles. Then bishops and so on.
Nothing ever is 100% and we have to make concessions to allow improvements but I do hope the tactics of manoeuvre, exploitation, deployment etc. are not one of the sacrifices we have to make. Or else it'll be just a game of "push of pike". That may become boring.
Sorry for rambling ... I've bust my back again and am on some seriously strong Tramadol hits. Basically ... I'm off my face ...
|
|
|
Post by Trickstick on May 19, 2017 19:06:47 GMT -5
Where did you /hear that little gem ? I think it was this little bit from the 8th Answers thing: It is a bit ambiguous now that I reread it, there is wiggle room that you will be able to "use the models", it doesn't explicitly state that FW gets new rules. I would expect there to be at least a document with many of their best sellers in it though. For instance, I expect my vulture will get rules, maybe not the co-axial stubbers for my vanquisher. As for the wound allocation, I like it for one main reason: it is far more cinematic. I love the look of my Commissar leading the charge with a platoon of Guardsmen following, as opposed to hiding in the back like some coward.
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on May 20, 2017 5:50:25 GMT -5
Life without templates.... Seriously, what are we supposed to do with all these blast markers? Table mats to put your coffee mug on?
I'm willing to try the new rules but only after having some fun with all the old rules. I still haven't had a chance to assemble my mechanicus or Genestealer cult or use the codexs. Chaos players just got decent rules in Traitor Legions; such a shame to throw it all away straight away. Plus I need to try the Castellans of the Imperium formation using my spanking new MT codex.
|
|
|
Post by nutty on May 20, 2017 6:07:23 GMT -5
Chaos players just got decent rules in Traitor Legions; such a shame to throw it all away straight away. Well they need something to complain about, I'm pretty sure having a halfway decent ruleset has led to an identity crisis in a number of CSM players. As for the forgeworld rules; I hope they update them fairly. But in the end they'll pretty much have to right? Otherwise most of their stuff becomes display-only in game terms.. I'm just bummed the upcoming "Tau vs Mechanicum/Imperium"-book will probably get pushed back again.
|
|
|
Post by dougeye on May 20, 2017 12:20:15 GMT -5
For my 30th and in prep for 8th I felt it necessary to purchase a chaos reaver... Ready the spray paint!
|
|
|
Post by emptyhat on May 20, 2017 15:30:04 GMT -5
Chaos players just got decent rules in Traitor Legions; such a shame to throw it all away straight away. Well they need something to complain about, I'm pretty sure having a halfway decent ruleset has led to an identity crisis in a number of CSM players. As for the forgeworld rules; I hope they update them fairly. But in the end they'll pretty much have to right? Otherwise most of their stuff becomes display-only in game terms.. I'm just bummed the upcoming "Tau vs Mechanicum/Imperium"-book will probably get pushed back again. Not just the rules being decent but spreading them through 3 books to buy, something of a cash milking before the end. Also with Primaris Marines coming are Chaos going to be left with just gretchin marines, or will they escalate too.
|
|